From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Decker

Supreme Court of Arizona
Apr 25, 2003
Supreme Court No. SB-03-0028-D Disciplinary Commission, Nos. 99-1778 00-1281 (Ariz. Apr. 25, 2003)

Opinion

Supreme Court No. SB-03-0028-D Disciplinary Commission, Nos. 99-1778 00-1281

Filed April 25, 2003.


AMENDED JUDGMENT AND ORDER

This matter having come on for hearing before the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona, it having duly rendered its decision and no discretionary or sua sponte review occurring,

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that CRAIG A. DECKER, a member of the State Bar of Arizona, is hereby suspended from the practice of law for a period of six (6) months and one (1) day, effective thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, for conduct in violation of his duties and obligations as a lawyer, as disclosed in the commission report.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that CRAIG A. DECKER shall be placed on probation for a period of two (2) years upon reinstatement, under the following terms and conditions:

1. Respondent shall not commit any ethical violations during the probationary period.

2. Respondent shall respond promptly and completely to any bar inquiries or requests for information.

3. Respondent shall maintain malpractice insurance.

4. Respondent shall continue with psychiatric or psychological treatment as deemed appropriate by his doctor and after consultation with the director of the Member Assistance Program (MAP) or her designee.

5. Respondent shall, at his expense, enter into a contract with MAP for a practice monitor. The practice monitor is to file quarterly reports with the State Bar, setting forth steps which he or she has taken during the reporting period and describing: (a) the status of Respondent's workload; and (b) any deficiencies observed in Respondent's practice, including but not limited to, any conduct which would be a violation of the Rule of Professional Conduct.

6. In the event that Respondent fails to comply with any of the foregoing conditions, and information thereof is received by the State Bar, bar counsel shall file with the Hearing Officer a Notice of Non-Compliance, pursuant to Rule 51(j). The Hearing Officer shall conduct a hearing at the earliest practicable date, but in no event later than thirty (30) days after receipt of notice, to determine whether a condition of probation has been breached and, if so, to recommend an appropriate sanction therefore.

7. In the event there is an allegation that any of these terms have been breached, the burden of proof shall be on the State Bar of Arizona to prove non-compliance by a preponderance of the evidence.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent shall pay in full any and all claims paid by the Client Protection Fund, not to exceed the maximum permissible payment of $100,000.00.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 63, Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona, including, but not limited to, Rule 63(a), which requires that Respondent notify all of his clients, within ten (10) days from the date hereof, of his inability to represent them and that he should promptly inform this Court of his compliance with this Order as provided in Rule 63(d).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent shall comply with all rule provisions regarding reinstatement proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 52(a)8, the State Bar of Arizona is granted judgment against CRAIG A. DECKER for costs and expenses of these proceedings in the amount of $1,520.60, together with interest at the legal rate from the date of this judgment.

DATED this _____ day of ________, 2003.

_______________________ NOEL K. DESSAINT, Clerk


Summaries of

In re Decker

Supreme Court of Arizona
Apr 25, 2003
Supreme Court No. SB-03-0028-D Disciplinary Commission, Nos. 99-1778 00-1281 (Ariz. Apr. 25, 2003)
Case details for

In re Decker

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF A MEMBER OF THE STATE BAR OF ARIZONA, CRAIG A. DECKER…

Court:Supreme Court of Arizona

Date published: Apr 25, 2003

Citations

Supreme Court No. SB-03-0028-D Disciplinary Commission, Nos. 99-1778 00-1281 (Ariz. Apr. 25, 2003)